CPU Comparison

Intel Xeon W5590 and Intel Core i7-875K are both 45 nm Nehalem-based parts with 4 cores and 8 threads, but they target different sockets and market segments. The Xeon W5590 is a server/workstation chip on Socket 1366, while the i7-875K is a desktop part on Socket 1156. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 986 for the Xeon versus 984 for the i7, placing both at the 27th percentile among all CPUs. The data shows a consistent, though modest, performance edge for the Xeon across every Cinebench test, with deltas between 4.7% and 5.1%. However, the i7-875K offers an unlocked multiplier, which the Xeon lacks, and its 95 W TDP is substantially lower than the Xeon’s 130 W.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Xeon W5590 than the Core i7-875K in multi-core workloads?

A: The Xeon W5590 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 1204 versus 1146 for the i7-875K, a 5.1% lead. The R23 multi-core result shows a similar 5.1% advantage, with 2867 versus 2729.

Q: Do the two CPUs have the same single-core performance?

A: No, the Xeon W5590 is consistently ahead in single-core tests as well. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 169 versus 161, a 5% delta. The R23 single-core test shows 404 versus 385, a 4.9% lead.

Q: What is the difference in average benchmark scores between these two processors?

A: The Xeon W5590 has an average benchmark score of 986, while the i7-875K scores 984. This is a 0.2% difference, placing the Xeon as the nearest rival to the i7 with a deltaPct of -0.2% from the i7’s perspective.

Q: Does the Core i7-875K have any unique feature that the Xeon lacks?

A: Yes, the i7-875K has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for easier overclocking. The Xeon W5590’s multiplier is locked, so it lacks this flexibility.

Q: Which CPU supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Xeon W5590 supports ECC memory. The Core i7-875K does not, which is typical for a desktop-oriented part.

Q: How do their memory bandwidths compare?

A: The Xeon W5590 uses triple-channel memory with a bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s. The i7-875K uses dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 21.3 GB/s, meaning the Xeon has roughly 50% more theoretical memory bandwidth.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Xeon W5590 wins every single head-to-head test against the Core i7-875K. The largest margin is 5.1% in Cinebench R20 multi-core and R23 multi-core, while the smallest is 4.7% in R15 multi-core. If raw compute performance is the only criterion, the Xeon W5590 is the pick. However, the i7-875K counters with a much lower 95 W TDP versus 130 W, an unlocked multiplier, and a desktop platform that typically offers more accessible overclocking. The Xeon’s ECC memory support and triple-channel bandwidth make it the better choice for a workstation or server environment where stability and memory throughput matter. For a purely desktop build where overclocking is the goal, the i7-875K is the more practical option despite the slight performance deficit. Both chips sit at the 27th percentile, meaning neither is a top-tier performer today, but the Xeon’s consistent edge makes it the faster part in stock configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Xeon W5590 dominates the head-to-head results, winning all five Cinebench tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Xeon scores 288 against the i7-875K’s 275, a 4.7% advantage. The gap widens slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Xeon posts 1204 versus 1146, a 5.1% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows the same pattern: 2867 for the Xeon versus 2729 for the i7, again a 5.1% lead. Single-core results are similarly lopsided. Cinebench R20 single-core shows the Xeon at 169 and the i7 at 161, a 5% difference. Cinebench R23 single-core has the Xeon at 404 and the i7 at 385, a 4.9% margin. The i7-875K has no wins in any listed benchmark. While the absolute differences are small, often under 150 points, they are consistent across every workload, indicating a real per-clock advantage for the Xeon rather than a fluke. The i7’s higher base clock of 2.93 GHz versus the Xeon’s 3.33 GHz explains part of the gap, but both boost to the same 3.60 GHz, so the Xeon’s sustained performance is the differentiator.

Specification Differences

The two processors diverge on several key specifications. The Xeon W5590 has a base clock of 3.33 GHz, while the i7-875K runs at 2.93 GHz; both boost to 3.60 GHz. The Xeon uses the Intel Socket 1366, whereas the i7-875K fits Intel Socket 1156. The Xeon’s TDP is 130 W, notably higher than the i7’s 95 W. Memory support differs: the Xeon uses triple-channel DDR3 with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7 uses dual-channel DDR3 with 21.3 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Xeon but not on the i7. The Xeon has a locked multiplier; the i7-875K is multiplier-unlocked. The Xeon’s market segment is Server/Workstation, while the i7 is Desktop. The Xeon has 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die, while the i7 has 774 million transistors on a 296 mm² die. The Xeon was released in August 2009; the i7 arrived in May 2010. The Xeon’s part number is SLBGE, and the i7’s is SLBS2. The Xeon’s launch MSRP was $1600, while the i7-875K launched at $353.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on Intel’s Nehalem architecture, but they come from different codenames and dies. The Xeon W5590 is from the Gainestown family, while the i7-875K is from Lynnfield. Both use a 45 nm process node and are manufactured by Intel. The cache hierarchy is identical in size: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. The transistor counts differ slightly, 731 million for the Xeon versus 774 million for the i7, and the die sizes are 263 mm² versus 296 mm², respectively. The Xeon supports triple-channel memory, which the i7 lacks, and it also supports ECC memory. The i7-875K has an unlocked multiplier, a feature absent from the Xeon. Both use PCIe Gen 2, but the i7 specifies 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Xeon does not list a lane count. Neither chip has integrated graphics. The Xeon’s memory bandwidth of 32.0 GB/s is substantially higher than the i7’s 21.3 GB/s, reflecting the extra memory channel. The i7’s larger die and transistor count suggest a different physical layout despite the same core count and cache sizes. The Xeon targets server workloads with ECC and higher bandwidth, while the i7 is designed for desktop use with overclocking headroom.

Where Each One Wins

The Xeon W5590 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, so its strengths are clear. It is the faster processor in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests, with leads ranging from 4.7% to 5.1%. This makes it the better choice for any workload that relies on raw CPU throughput, such as rendering, compilation, or scientific computing. Its triple-channel memory with 32.0 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support further cement its position for server or workstation tasks where memory reliability and bandwidth are critical. The i7-875K, while losing all benchmarks, has its own advantages. The unlocked multiplier is a significant feature for enthusiasts who plan to overclock, potentially closing the gap with the Xeon. Its lower 95 W TDP makes it easier to cool and more power-efficient in a desktop chassis. The i7 is also the only one of the two with a Geekbench score, 1696 multi-core and 499 single-core, though the Xeon has no such score listed, so a direct comparison there is impossible. For a desktop build where overclocking and lower power draw matter more than a 5% performance edge, the i7-875K is the sensible choice. For a dual-socket workstation or a server where ECC and memory bandwidth are non-negotiable, the Xeon W5590 is the only option that fits. The data shows a clear performance winner, but the i7’s feature set makes it the more flexible desktop part for tinkerers.